Why ask this question?

HouOz

Active member
When a person states that no evidence for gods exists, why would you ask the inane question:- "...and your evidence is...?" ?
If the question is intended as some form of rebuttal, how does it rebut without providing actual evidence to rebut with?
If said question is intended as some form of "gotcha", then it fails - miserably.
Those who say there is no evidence for any gods will continue to affirm that façt until evidence to the contrary is provided.
Here's your chance, Mr. Star Trek alien.
 

Torin

Well-known member
If we read the question with a degree of charity far higher than that warranted by anything in Mr. Star Trek Alien's posting history, it could be interpreted as a request for a summary of the unbeliever's reasons for objecting to the arguments for God's existence.
 

HouOz

Active member
If we read the question with a degree of charity far higher than that warranted by anything in Mr. Star Trek Alien's posting history, it could be interpreted as a request for a summary of the unbeliever's reasons for objecting to the arguments for God's existence.
Possibly, however, Mr. STA's curt replies do him no favours.
This is a discussion forum, so brevity is counterproductive if it is ambiguous.
 

Algor

Well-known member
When a person states that no evidence for gods exists, why would you ask the inane question:- "...and your evidence is...?" ?
If the question is intended as some form of rebuttal, how does it rebut without providing actual evidence to rebut with?
If said question is intended as some form of "gotcha", then it fails - miserably.
Those who say there is no evidence for any gods will continue to affirm that façt until evidence to the contrary is provided.
Here's your chance, Mr. Star Trek alien.
My chief objection to that sort of thing, as employed regularly on this board, is that it is unbelievably boring. You know you aren't going to be engaged in good faith, so why bother? "Ignore" is your friend.
 

Harry Leggs

Well-known member
When a person states that no evidence for gods exists, why would you ask the inane question:- "...and your evidence is...?" ?
If the question is intended as some form of rebuttal, how does it rebut without providing actual evidence to rebut with?
If said question is intended as some form of "gotcha", then it fails - miserably.
Those who say there is no evidence for any gods will continue to affirm that façt until evidence to the contrary is provided.
Here's your chance, Mr. Star Trek alien.
The question presupposes God makes house calls. An Infinite Being appears on demand. Kinda lame excuse. Besides atheism explains nothing. A living God explains pretty much everything including purpose.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
The question presupposes God makes house calls. An Infinite Being appears on demand. Kinda lame excuse. Besides atheism explains nothing. A living God explains pretty much everything including purpose.
Pretty much any religion explains everything. There are several works of science fiction that explain everything. There are books of children's fables that explain everything. There is nothing to show that any of these explanations are true. Including yours.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Possibly, however, Mr. STA's curt replies do him no favours.
This is a discussion forum, so brevity is counterproductive if it is ambiguous.
Where that particular poster is concerned, brevity is the best policy.

As a point of order, I believe that it is Mrs STA, or perhaps more probably, Ms.
 

Harry Leggs

Well-known member
Pretty much any religion explains everything.
And you know that how?
There are several works of science fiction that explain everything.
Name them and i can probably come up with something it does not explain. There are two scenarios atheism does not explain the origin of the universe and origin of life here. Christian Theism explains both. As an added bonus Christianity is incompatible with race slavery while your atheism applied equals race slavery.
There are books of children's fables that explain everything. There is nothing to show that any of these explanations are true. Including yours.
We have written accounts that makes historical truth claims and is falsifiable. You, on the other hand equalize it all which is not the case. Yiou can think what you wnat but you cannot prove anything and your atheism explains not one thing.
 

HouOz

Active member
And you know that how?

Name them and i can probably come up with something it does not explain. There are two scenarios atheism does not explain the origin of the universe and origin of life here. Christian Theism explains both. As an added bonus Christianity is incompatible with race slavery while your atheism applied equals race slavery.

We have written accounts that makes historical truth claims and is falsifiable. You, on the other hand equalize it all which is not the case. Yiou can think what you wnat but you cannot prove anything and your atheism explains not one thing.
And there are many reasons those explanations have no credibility.
Among them are they do not align with scientific fact or are simply illogical.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
And you know that how?

Name them and i can probably come up with something it does not explain. There are two scenarios atheism does not explain the origin of the universe and origin of life here. Christian Theism explains both. As an added bonus Christianity is incompatible with race slavery while your atheism applied equals race slavery.

We have written accounts that makes historical truth claims and is falsifiable. You, on the other hand equalize it all which is not the case. Yiou can think what you wnat but you cannot prove anything and your atheism explains not one thing.
The problem you have is that the explanation Christianity gives doesn't hold water. Christianity tries to explain and fails. Atheism doesn't try to explain anything. Both immoral and moral actions are compatible with atheism. Only moral (or what Christians claim are moral) actions are compatible with Christianity. Yet immoral things still happen. Many of them performed by apparently devout Christians acting in faith. That would indicate that atheism is a better descriptor of reality than Christianity.
 

CrowCross

Well-known member
This is what we are endeavoring to ascertain.
Evidence is an excellent tool to do this.
If I used ID as proof of God....the atheist might claim we were made by an intelligent being from a galaxy Long long ago far far away.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Athiest typically try to explain our existence using the Big bang and evolutionism.

What do you use?
No. That would be scientists. People who study and describe reality. Many of them are atheists, but many more are theists of all stripes including Christian. There are a few people who deny reality. They too come from all faiths and none. You are one of them. You think of yourself as part of an exclusive band of brothers, bound together in faith, holding the truth. In fact you are one of a mish-mash of confused and bewildered people blinded by their ideas and incapable of seeing the truth in front of you.
 

HouOz

Active member
If I used ID as proof of God....the atheist might claim we were made by an intelligent being from a galaxy Long long ago far far away.
Whatever you use as proof has to pass scientific scrutiny. It must also pass the logic test.
 

Algor

Well-known member
If I used ID as proof of God....the atheist might claim we were made by an intelligent being from a galaxy Long long ago far far away.
One of the many problems with ID as proof of God. Little green men (or women) are as plausible (or possibly more, depending on the POV) as supernatural forces.
 

Harry Leggs

Well-known member
The problem you have is that the explanation Christianity gives doesn't hold water.
Opinion
Christianity tries to explain and fails.
Opinion
Atheism doesn't try to explain anything.
Atheism does not explain anything and is compatible with murder and race slavery. The unborn is human but not a person therefore we can do anything we want including murder and experimentation with the unborn. Because even though they are human they are not persons. The same ethic applied to blacks. Humans but not persons with no rights. Therefore they can make them race slaves. It is the same ethic. The same mentality.
Both immoral and moral actions are compatible with atheism.
There is no immoral in atheism. You are assuming facts not in evidence. How many times can you make the same blunder?
Only moral (or what Christians claim are moral) actions are compatible with Christianity. Yet immoral things still happen. Many of them performed by apparently devout Christians acting in faith. That would indicate that atheism is a better descriptor of reality than Christianity.
LOL!
 

Whatsisface

Well-known member
Atheism does not explain anything and is compatible with murder and race slavery. The unborn is human but not a person therefore we can do anything we want including murder and experimentation with the unborn.
I take it then, if you were suddenly to become an atheist, you would be fine with murder and race slavery etc? How about rape?
 
Top